The BombayHigh Court ruled that for technical reasons, substantive benefits under the SVLDR programme cannot be rejected.
Facts
Petitioner is inter alia engaged in providing professional services as film artist, as brand ambassador, for special and personal appearance for advertisement and stage shows and was registered as service provider under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. In the year 2018, Anti Evasion Officers had issued summons to the Petitioner in response to which Petitioner had furnished certain documents for the period April 2016 to June 2017. On 1 September 2019, the Central Government introduced Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (“SVLDR Scheme”) to bring an end to pending litigation under the indirect tax regime. Petitioner took advantage of this scheme and filed SVLDRS-1 on 30 December 2019 for the period April 2016 to June 2017 declaring Rs. 9,16,203/- as tax dues.
Submissions
Advocate Raichandani, appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that the Petitioner had exchanged extensive correspondence with the Respondent Authorities with respect to the reversal and vide communication Respondent-Bank has informed the Petitioner that the amount paid to the Government was reversed due to expiry of challan.
He submitted that for no fault of the Petitioner the benefit of the scheme is being denied due to a technical error which occurred due to expiry of challan and despite efforts made by the Petitioner in this regard to make payment pursuant to SVLDRS-3.
Mr. Chandrashekhar, Counsel for Respondent Authorities submitted that Petitioner has failed to make the payment on or before 30 June 2020 and therefore can not get the benefit of SVLDR Scheme.
He referred to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M/s Yashi Constructions Vs. Union of India and Ors. and submitted that it is settled proposition of law that a person, who wants to avail the benefit of a particular Scheme has to abide by the terms and conditions of the Scheme scrupulously.
He submitted that not only the time to make the payment has expired long back the Scheme is also over now.
Decision
The division bench of Justice Abhay Ahuja and Justice Nitin Jamdar observed that that in the facts of this case the Petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit of the SVLDR Scheme merely on the basis of a technical issue of reversal of the amount paid by Petitioner prior to 30 June 2020 on the ground of expiry of challan for which clearly the Petitioner was not at fault.
The bench allowed the Petition and directed the Respondent-Authorities to allow the Petitioner to pay the amount of Rs. 2,74,860/- under the SVLDR Scheme pursuant to the subject SVLDRS-3 and thereafter, issue the necessary discharge certificate under the said scheme.
Case title: Shri Arjun Amarjeet Rampal V/S. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: WRIT PETITION NO. 1468 OF 2021
